Holy S***! NO Multiplayer Until Spring!

[Ralf]

Originally posted by tniem
I don't want to have to buy a ton of addons just to play the game that I should have originally gotten.

Well, its not exactly "a ton of addons" we talking about, is it? Just one reduced price expansion-pack, available a couple of months later. And it will certainly contain a whole lot more then just added multiplayer-support.

By the way: What about MP-related patches, as a consequence of rushed development?

But I agree with Snapcase that I am very skeptical about these reports.

Being skeptical about non-official news is always wise. Its not that I have anything against MP-support from the very start. Why should I? IF they manage to add reliable MP-support before christmas-01, then both thumbs up.

It just that IF they have trouble with development-schedule, then they shouldnt delay the whole game until spring-02 (and by that miss the christmas-sales), just because of that MP-support. Remember that, the more they put into "MP before christmas", the less they can put into "SP before christmas" (and vice versa). They have after all, a limited staff over at Firaxis.

Finally, nobody plays Civ-3 MP very good anyway, just 1-2 weeks after the release. Why not put the MP-delay (IF really true) into good use? Play against the AI - learn the game inside out. Learn all the tricks, get familiar with game-tweaking editors.

[TCO]

I TOLD YOU SO!!!

P.s. Even if you wait until March, you will probably have to buy both the original plus the addon.

[SITS]

I wonder if the delay, if true, is down to having servers ready etc. If so then they should still be able to have PBeM/Hotseat enabled to allow people to play that way. I would be very disappointed if this is true.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Mister Pleasant
That was the whole message except Kelley Gilmore's phone and email (she's Firaxis's communication manager). Nor was it a scam to get news or a free game.

My idea is that for my philosophy class next semester, where I teach Turing, I would set up a project with four students per game, four AI controlled players. I would set up the games and tell students who they were in the game - but that's all. PBEM format. In game chat would be disabled to make it more difficult to determine who is who. Students goal would be to play the game alone until the point in the semester when we get to Turing. Then they would devise their own test to predict which civs are human controlled and which civs are computer controlled. After they turn in their papers about their tests and predictions I would say who was who. Philosophy relevant and in action instead of just on paper. Boosts enrollment in my class, I would publish both on the results of the test and in an educational journal about using the project in class.

Oh and if anyone is thinking about using this as a scam to get free games, all of the companes who have actually sent me games for evaluation DID check my credentials and shipped them to my office - so don't try it.

BTW, anyone have any suggestions on a game I could use?

1. Sounds like a fun experiment. And you have a good plan for writing it up.

2. I think with Civ3, you might have a hard time doing a 4/4 game because we may have one civ as the barbarians...like civ2. Maybe 3/4 would work.

3. You might want to just buy the games...that way there is no scam issue as a concern.

4. Why not use civ2MGE or SMAC? I think the experiment should be done with a proven game not a new one.

[faded glory]

What about PBEM!? That must be in the first release. Otherwise Firaxis isnt getting one penny from me.


PBEM Confirmation anybody!?


To my knowledge it comes with the game right off the bat

[Ralf]

Originally posted by SITS
I would be very disappointed if this is true.

I dont know if its the CTP-2 experience that scares people.

Activision declared 3 months before the release, that MP-support would be "temporarily" postponed, but later the sales of CTP-2 plummeted beyond repair. They was forced to quickly abandon the whole project. Not even a second patch. MP-support that could have worked as a recompense for a lousy AI - was simply never available.

[Inverse Icarus]

i will FUCHING RETURN CIV 3 AND GOTO HUNT VALLY AND SPIT ON SID MIER'S FACE FOR RELEASING A GAME LIKE THIS WITHOUT MULTIPLAYER.

[tniem]

Originally posted by GP
3. You might want to just buy the games...that way there is no scam issue as a concern.

But if he needs to install it on all of his student's computers than he needs permission. That or make it required to purchase the game to enter his class. I would love a professor to require us to buy a video game instead of a text book. It would be cheaper and as long as it was educational it would be a lot more fun.

[CapTVK]

Originally posted by GP


1. Sounds like a fun experiment. And you have a good plan for writing it up.

2. I think with Civ3, you might have a hard time doing a 4/4 game because we may have one civ as the barbarians...like civ2. Maybe 3/4 would work.

3. You might want to just buy the games...that way there is no scam issue as a concern.

4. Why not use civ2MGE or SMAC? I think the experiment should be done with a proven game not a new one.

Or why not try out FreeCiv ( www.freeciv.org ). The open source version of civ offers full multiplayer support and has decent AI (well, it's certainly agressive ) . That the source code is included will also be a big bonus. You can show bits of the code in your report.

I do suggest playing it on Linux or with an X-windows manager. The windows version is a bit sluggish in isometric view (flat view is faster).


Back to MP...

I should mention that firaxis is NOT an indie. Any decision on the future of Civ3 is in the hands of Infogrames. So there proabably isn't a thing Firaxis could do about it. Even if they wished.

Any takers on a release date for the next data disk?

[Inverse Icarus]

i have no tolerance for this crap.

you honestly have no idea how pissed i am at this. it makes no sense. the AI cannot provide a challange over and over. it's just HOW games work. you find their flaws and exploit them. HUMAN OPPONENTS CAN DO SO MUCH MORE THAN AN AI. god.

i am so damn mad.

i hope this is some goddamn joke and this a$$hole gets banned from the forums.

[dennis580]

The Civ franchise has and always will be a single player game. I think Firaxis should be commended for having the courage to not waste time and resources on mulitplayer

[SITS]

dennis580
The Civ franchise has and always will be a single player game. I think Firaxis should be commended for having the courage to not waste time and resources on mulitplayer

I suspect you will find that view isn't universally held....

[isaac brock]

Originally posted by GP
2. I think with Civ3, you might have a hard time doing a 4/4 game because we may have one civ as the barbarians...like civ2. Maybe 3/4 would work.

WRONG! Firaxis has said EIGHT civs, and they aren't just dicking around and secretly mean the barbarians are a civ. Which is why they have screens for EIGHT civs in diplomcy and stuff. You don't see one picture on that screen of a slobbering barbarian tearing the meat off a skunk leg or anything. I'm always right! Everyone else is wrong! Go home!

[tniem]

Originally posted by isaac brock
WRONG! Firaxis has said EIGHT civs, and they aren't just dicking around and secretly mean the barbarians are a civ. Which is why they have screens for EIGHT civs in diplomcy and stuff. You don't see one picture on that screen of a slobbering barbarian tearing the meat off a skunk leg or anything. I'm always right! Everyone else is wrong! Go home!

Whose DL is this? And when can it be banned?

[tniem]

Originally posted by dennis580
The Civ franchise has and always will be a single player game. I think Firaxis should be commended for having the courage to not waste time and resources on mulitplayer

Except they have told us that they are planning something for MP. That means even if would be commendable to only do single player for a game they have still lied to us. And to that, I would be highly disappointed to the point I would consider not purchasing this game and would definitely ignore SM's Sim Golf.